Speaking of Democracy in Afghanistan…

Regarding our post earlier today about President Obama de-emphasizing democracy in Afghanistan, our friend Olivier Knox of AFP brings to our attention the following exchange from Thursday.

The scene: the Senate Foreign Relations Committee confirmation hearing of Lt. Gen. Karl Eikenberry to be U.S. Ambassador to Afghanistan.  Eikenberry has already served two military tours in Afghanistan, most recently as U.S. commander there from 2005 to 2007.

Towards the end of the hearing, Eikenberry tells Sen. Bob Casey, D-Pa., that what "will be essential is that we over time help the Afghans to create the conditions so that international terrorism will never regain a refuge there. We can see what the outlines of that program look like. It’s developing Afghan national security forces that increasingly can secure their own people. It’s developing a system of government, in Afghanistan, and a rule of law, so that those security forces sit on top of a foundation of good governance, and then beyond that developing an economy of Afghanistan, so the Afghans can sustain themselves over a period of time, all of that then nested within the regional approach between Afghanistan, Pakistan and beyond."

This mention of "developing a system of government in Afghanistan" concerned the committee chair, Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass.

"General, we’re almost wrapped up here," Kerry said, "but I do want to probe a little bit a couple of areas that concern me, and particularly one based on the answer that you gave to Sen. Casey’s question. Sen. Casey asked you sort of about the general mission, etc., and keeping the support of folks. And you started to run down a list of things that we need to do, and I think I heard you say developing a system of government, developing an economy, etc.

"I began to get worried when hear you saying all that," Kerry said. "That’s not what I certainly defined — I mean, there’s some component of that, but that’s, in my judgment, not our mission. And I want to hear, with clarity, what you’re saying the mission is or what you understand it to be as we come out of this review, because there are just going to be some limits, I think, speaking realistically; I think you have a sense of that."

Kerry said: "Yes, we have to help them develop a system," but "that’s sort of what President Bush described, and that’s not what I view as the current definition of the mission as we’re thinking about it, but to help them to help themselves. It’s not up to us to develop a system of government. We have to help them to develop their economy, and it’s up to the Europeans and a lot of people to be part of that. So I’d like to hear you sort of reiterate with a clarity sort of how we’re approaching this mission."

It may be — this is pure hypothesis — that Eikenberry, who was commander in Afghanistan during the Bush years, had accidentally fallen back on some of the language from the Bush era; that president spoke of a "flourishing democracy" in Afghanistan as a key part of the mission.

Either way, the good general quickly corrected himself.

"Success is, in Afghanistan, inside of Pakistan, that we have defeated al Qaeda and international terrorism which threatens our country; and then in order to achieve that, creating the conditions in Afghanistan so that we don’t have the environment which pervaded in the 1990s which allowed al Qaeda, international terrorism to have open sanctuary, to have an open safe haven inside of Afghanistan," the general said.

"Your characterization is the correct one," Eikenberry said. "If I was characterizing it as ‘we will develop,’ as opposed to ‘we will assist the Afghans develop,’ then I would like to stand corrected, because this is about enabling the Afghans to develop governments and rule of law, enabling the Afghans to develop their own security forces, enabling the Afghans to develop a sustainable economy. Those are the three critical components. When they come together, success would be defined then as an Afghan state strong enough to not become an open safe haven for international terrorism."

Kerry said: "The mission is to keep al Qaeda from coming back. It may take the Afghans a little longer to develop their government. But they haven’t proven, in the last six years, a particular disposition to want to do that, frankly. And that’s one of the reasons why the Taliban have been able to move back in, because of the absence of governance. … We want the government to succeed. But I think our strategy, as I think it is, is beginning to focus on how we empower people locally and provincially and otherwise and play to some of the tribal realities historically that would re-empower people locally, to be able to take control of their lives and reject the Taliban."

- jpt